MAB

I'd go for 'animal' :-)

I see. For reviewers I think there is a 'you must not sell this' type agreement anyway. I still think it is a bit bizarre that they are only in certain countries as it is not like there is an app that can only be used in some regions or languages, and presumably stock all comes from the same warehouse within a region.

I doubt that would work. Once a product is sold, they cannot really control its resale. And they never tried that when they did regional exclusives in the past, or if you currently buy from LEGO House. Especially if a child buys a set, they cannot force them into signing a contract. I really doubt the regional exclusivity is because they don't want them sold in those regions but more about testing and promoting markets where they can do it easily.

For the picture, white for the building on the left and tan for the one on the right might work. It really depends on the lighting. Same here, especially for the in-between LBG and DBG.

Characters like that often have splats to emphasise the role such as the various mechanics, the cake boy, artist, etc.

But not if it has chocolate splashes on the torso and legs.

I imagine that is a umour based on similar rumours for SW. The contracts are never made public so we never know what agreements they have made.

I don't think the minifigure is really missing from SW Helmets, or if it would be a big deal if one was included. I think all the characters that had SW Helmets had readily available minifigures in cheap sets. That is where Sauron is different. I already bought a fake Sauron as I wanted to customise him by cutting and painting him anyway but I was also considering buying a genuine one "for the collection" as I don't really care for Barad-Dur so wasn't going to buy the set for myself. The figure appearing in the Helmet set makes it a no brainer for me. I wouldn't mind it if they do the same thing with the Witch King. Have him in a big set, then later repeat in a Helmet set.

Yes I do. And that is my point about the Tower of Orthanc numbers. Not everyone puts their collection on there and not everyone on there tells the truth.

And 10421 own Helm's Deep, which suggests a remake of that wouldn't sell well especially if that group overlap a lot with the (only) 10996 people that bought Rivendell. Or maybe brickset stats need to be taken with a big pinch of salt as they are not representative of the market.

I don't think there are lots of people with the original, not enough that sales wood be low for acre-release. It was the most expensive set of the original releases, I don’t think it was ever discounted and was from a time before LEGO had really taken off.

The other issue is going out of stock as soon as they come back in stock. I had to wait about six months to get any Black Falcons torsos, not because they were long term removed but because people kept buying them all as soon as they came back. Of course, after a while stock settles down.

Lego know that in the past six months, 49 Orthanc sets have sold on bricklink, worldwide, used and new. They also know that there are 49 left in asellers' stock listed on BL. With those tiny numbers, I doubt they'd consider stock of the old one when deciding to produce a new one. They clearly didn't with The Shire.

Maybe for the Modulars. I still think there should do a public convenience GWP to go with the modulars. They do enough toilets in private spaces now, so those in the street need somewhere to go.

That is presumably because City and Friends are aimed entirely at children and there are no adult sets. Similarly sets in licensed themes aimed at children tend to be playsets, whereas the ones aimed at adults in the same theme tend to focus more on display than play.

If these consumers had no time to view the sets, and the pre-release was during the working day (it was at the same time worldwide so someone somewhere would be working) when they were at work, then how could they have seen the advert and been evilly manipulated to by it forcing them to buy the sets without thinking? The sets are not released yet. They will be on shelves in a month and will presumably be available for at least a year, along with other sets in future. These consumers have not missed anything except for the GWP and there is a possibility that will be back for the store release. The advert is a bit of fun. It is not evil manipulation.

Is that really any different to unlicensed sets? I think this is more down to the builder than the theme. A kid that keeps their Star Wars sets built is likely to keep their Dreamzzz or Ninjago sets built. Whereas a kid that mixes up all the bricks from their unlicensed sets is probably going to mix up their licensed sets too. And linking it to costs of the nobby, it is far better to keep sets together if they think they will want to sell it to help buy different sets in future than to mix it all up. The other big difference now and decades ago is the amount of toys kids have. When I was a kid we had a limited amount of bricks and if I wanted to build, I had to take things apart. Whereas now, kids appear to have a lot more. Obviously that may be personal circumstances but I get the impression it was and is similar to other families.

I know of cases both ways, where some people have bought one set due to the license and that remains the only set they have bought whereas others bought the first set, then another from another theme and another... One woman I know bought the first Friends set (the TV show, not LEGO theme) and has gone on to buy probably 50 sets since so is doing about one a month. Not just licensed sets either, she has all sorts and really seems into botanicals now. And she was amazed when I showed her it was possible to build other things without following instructions at all or just vary them a little to make them look more unique! Are they doing that for enjoyment though or clicks and advertising revenue? Rushing and making mistakes goes hand in hand with the need to be the first if they are monetising the videos.

While they might not need a new parts budget, a brick built Smaug would need a lot of parts. So both ways, it would be expensive.

LEGO has changed a lot since COVID and really it started before that, about 2015 (The LEGO Movie time). Adults started to get more involved and so adult LEGO took off. Before that it was often a 'dirty secret' that some adults bought LEGO for themselves but it has become mainstream and legitimate now. There are a lot of "thing" sets and I guess that goes hand in hand with the rise of adult fans wanting display pieces. It is not 50% but they are popular. As to whether people ask for them, absolutely! The Polaroid camera, the typewriter, ship in a bottle, grand piano, etc have all come through IDEAS so at least 10000 people asked for them, and then they were bought in the 10,000s by consumers. When will it wear off? Who knows! Part of LEGO's strategy is to market to new groups of people rather than just long term LEGO fans, so maybe people aren't getting sick of shelling out large sums for LEGO as they don't do it very often.

They do a second chance at a first impression, as when they are ready to release mini-hubs or whatever then they'll call them something different. And with new branding, it's a new chance for a first impression. I doubt mini-hubs are that far off, but only if there is a market for them. When you look at the size of some of the nano boards available now (and in fact for many years already) they are not all that much bigger. The real issue is the size of the battery, especially if it is going to drive motors.

I went with a £50 order to get free postage and to get the parts I want now, then I'll place a bigger order once there is a decent GWP. If bricklink prices remain high, I might even sell half the stuff I want when it arrives and buy again in future with a GWP.

These are fans that have lived with the "Gotta catch 'em all" slogan of the franchise they follow. I think the advert taps into the nostalgia quite well, showing some adults remembering what they used to be like in days gone by, and modifies the slogan slightly to put it into LEGO context. If anyone sees the advert and thinks LEGO is telling them to ditch all their adult responsibilities and that they should neglect everything else in their lives, then they probably have some serious issues.

I don't see the problem with the advert. Directly targeting the people the sets are aimed at seems sensible to me.

Yeah, I don't think LEGO care they made them before. It was long enough ago that they will do them again if they think they will sell well now. Just like Bag End.